o 



10 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



same Hundred (1825), a few pages further on, 39, No. 295, he describes 

 Cramer's timais and refers it as congeneric with unio. His genus 

 Eiithisanotia thus comprises wiio and timais. Timais was almost 

 certainly autoptically unknown to Hiibner when he wrote the Verzeichniss ; 

 he figures it in the Zutraege on account of Cramer's defective figure 

 (unrichtiges Bild). In the Verzeichniss Hubner refers timais to Xan- 

 thopastis, and this course leads Berg to suggest that this latter term should 

 be used for timais. Evidently in the Zutraege Hubner corrects this 

 reference, and, in effect, Xanthopastis is really a synonym of Folia, Hubm 

 The European species of Folia show , yellow dottings (flavicincta), and 

 hence Hubner's generic name. Cramer's figure of timais shows the 

 yellow dottings of this species. Hubner lays his greatest stress on 

 markings and colour, and so, in the Verzeichniss, Cramer's species is 

 catalogued with the European ^^ Folice." Boisduval, in 1836, found thus 

 two species o( Eiithisanotia, 1825. He took wiio of the two generically 

 dissonant species as the type of his new genus Eudryas. Was he free to 

 do so? Does the fact that Hubner figures first (p. 12) unio, and then 

 (p. 39) timais, make unio the type of Eiithisanotia ? Or, is Euthisanotia^ 

 1825,- a mixed genus } 



The rule, as I understand it, with regard to mixed genera, is that the 

 succeeding authority may take any of the species as the type. of the new 

 genus, unless the original type is actually designated. This is not the 

 case with Hubner's genera, except by inference in the Tentamen, where 

 only one species is given, which is, of course, the type. This makes the 

 Tentamen so valuable. It is now generally known that Ochsenheimer 

 and Treitschke's genera are only catalogue names, and catalogue names 

 for such mixed assemblages that the " type " is diflftcult to decide. But 

 the Tentamen often gives us the key, by showing us the species for which 

 such names as Agrotis, Apatela, Folia, etc., were originally intended. 

 It is an error to assume thit the first species in any of the Verzeichniss 

 genera is the type. In seeking for the type, the student must study all 

 subsequent authorities to find out all restrictions of the original term. 

 Such restrictions of the original generic title for a mixed genus have the 

 force of priority and must be respected. A short and easy way is to refer 

 to the original and take the first species as the type of a mixed genus, 

 but this is a rough and insecure method. In my Buffalo List I have given 

 some results of my studies as to a few of the older Noctuid genera, and 

 these results, where my facts cannot be disputed, must be respected. . 



